<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1994 (2) TMI 193 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83486</link>
    <description>Penalty for taking Modvat credit on inputs stored outside the factory was reduced because the assessee had sought permission due to paucity of space, the department gave no response, the credit was reversed promptly when pointed out, and there was no allegation of double credit. On these undisputed facts, the conduct warranted substantial mitigation rather than a token penalty, so the penalty was cut from Rs. 1,00,000 to Rs. 2,000.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:30:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120631" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (2) TMI 193 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83486</link>
      <description>Penalty for taking Modvat credit on inputs stored outside the factory was reduced because the assessee had sought permission due to paucity of space, the department gave no response, the credit was reversed promptly when pointed out, and there was no allegation of double credit. On these undisputed facts, the conduct warranted substantial mitigation rather than a token penalty, so the penalty was cut from Rs. 1,00,000 to Rs. 2,000.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83486</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>